Alexander v. Rice

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedDecember 7, 2005
Docket05-7231
StatusUnpublished

This text of Alexander v. Rice (Alexander v. Rice) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alexander v. Rice, (4th Cir. 2005).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7231

ALEX DAVE ALEXANDER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

TERENA RICE, Sergeant; ANDRE HUSKINS, Lieutenant at McDowell County Jail; DEPUTY SHERIFF CAMPBELL, at McDowell County Jail; DEPUTY SHERIFF DUNCAN, at McDowell County Jail,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-180-1)

Submitted: November 22, 2005 Decided: December 7, 2005

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alex Dave Alexander, Appellant Pro Se. Patrick Houghton Flanagan, CRANFILL, SUMNER & HARTZOG, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina, Julie L. Kerr, CRANFILL, SUMNER & HARTZOG, L.L.P., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Alex Dave Alexander seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing his claims against defendant Campbell. This court

may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291

(2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.

§ 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus.

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Alexander seeks to

appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or

collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

- 2 -

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.
337 U.S. 541 (Supreme Court, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Alexander v. Rice, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alexander-v-rice-ca4-2005.